Thanks, yours has been the best and most comprehensive reply, very helpful.
I didn't mean to, but guess I did, imply "useless", I only listed what I saw from my perspective. You, and others, have salted me with some ideas, excellent.
difficult if not impossible to move around (though it's
not entirely clear -- is it a "plug and play" into a
pre-installed wall jack? If so, then it becomes "moveable", but
requires custom installation of jacks anywhere you'd use it.)
low powered processing
WinCE
IE6
limited standalone capability (designed to leverage Terminal
Services)
price (not really that inexpensive, no bargain over current
desktop prices, but much less functionality)
video memory (max video memory is 8M)
video resolution (max is 1600x1200)
expandability
I can't quite figure where this product fits. I'm guessing
it's more of a business solution, but if that's true, I can't
imagine it in any of the business settings I've experienced.
It's kind of cool technology, but is it a solution in search
of a problem?
Well I was able to get through about 30 pages of this
"review" and pretty much gave up. Hundreds of screen captures of
Vista "stuff" with a caption describing said capture does not a
review make.
So, I went to the last page to work my way back for summary
and recommendation info. Turns out, last page
is the summary. Save yourself some time, the
gist of this article is:
Microsoft's new Vista is surprisingly
entertaining. The new look of the operating system is good, and
lets it outshine its Linux and Mac OS competitors. One notices
repeatedly while working with this software that Microsoft scoped
out its competition very carefully.
It was TSO/almost ISPF (might have been available, but noone had learned or started using it yet) in 1983. No REXX available for TSO/MVS, they WERE using the recommended procedures from IBM. It was a telco so the size issues were pretty enormous back then.
I overheard a friend bemoaning the loathsome monthly
mainframe configuration task. It took four members of her team one
week of every month to edit in TSO the huge configuration files
to gen the mainframes. She showed me what kind of edits were
typical.
I took an example month's suite of edits, created an RJE job
that streamed the gen config to a little used ATT Unix box on
which I was self-teaching the coolness that was (and is) Unix.
On the Unix side, I piped the stream into a "sed" script with
a file defining all of the edits. The entire round trip of the
unedited file back into place with full edits on the mainframe
took less than one hour and required no monitoring or work on my
part other than initiating the job.
Not only did this save gi-huge time and man hours for that
team, the edits were always perfect (the edits were very simple,
e.g., new date and size configuration information), and the
preparation from one month to the next required only minor edits
to the "sed" edit script, which took minutes typically.
I got big-time recognition for what I thought was a simple
favor at the time. We were very pleased.
Oh, and then 20 years later a MotherFucker laid me off...
excellence doesn't guarantee employ. Sigh.
All true. I wasn't necessarily lashing out. I sometimes am frustrated by attention to things, as you put it, "not broken".
So, when there are things potentially needing fixing I'd rather see energy spent there. I haven't gotten mod points now for well over two years. Turns out, after being laid off from a job of 21 years, my available extra time to be MORE active on slashdot pushed me past +1 sigma in the slashdot activity -- slashdot picks modders from the norm.
Considering I do alright in my karma, etc., I think the modding system is broken (and there is evidence many others think so) and wish they'd redesign that.
(The telco that laid me off (sorry, can't give any clues in your qwest to guess which one) -- I was on the team that created their public facing web page. I can't begin to describe the discussions, time and energy spent over things like "this button is a little to brownish, it needs to be more yellowish". I was always the iconoclast, fighting to work on logic, database issues, but everyone wanted to be an artist.)
I just re-designed my house. It's was gray, but is now
slightly darker gray. I've widened the white trim around the
windows and porch railings a bit. And, I added a remote keypad
for my automatic garage door opener.
Seriously, I can take the new page, put it as a 50%
transparent layer under the old slashdot, and it comes close to
identical. Is there something more under the covers?
Now maybe we can get on to the less important stuff like
fixing the mod system. (Which will now demonstrate its fickle
nature by modding me to -1.)
(I love slashdot. I think it is one of the most important
forums on the internet. This re-design seems very similar to the
old design... I guess it wasn't intended to be a makeover.)
Hmmm, something I don't do often, I'm agreeing completely with all of your points.
I "launched" a bit and was probably primed... I'm soooo tired of DRM in almost any form and from any vendor. I don't think Apple is perfect.
And, as many posters pointed out, my rant appeared to mix iTunes and iPod. That was intentional. It is the culture and behavior Apple cultivates -- most iPod owners I know go the route of iTunes, and I find for most the distinction truly is blurred.
I failed to make my case on one point about DRM and mp3 compatibility. You are correct, mp3s play fine on iPods... it is the iTunes (again, based on my experience this is where most iPod owners go for their music) incompatibility the other way that frustrates.
I'll back off Apple, they aren't RIAA, and much of what and how they've done was dictated by RIAA.
..., One goes to the itunes store and buys a music file with a known quality...,
People don't know about quality, they assume it's good, as in, just like CDs. It's not their fault, noone really tells them differently. Yes, there's a lot of techno-mumbo-babble, but it is beyond the average consumers understanding. The surprise is when they create a CD, and rip, and start hearing funny noises. I'm not saying Apple lies about that, but the landscape for consumers has changed, and they're not being given the full story in easy-to-understand terms.
..., But complaining that their marketing "tricked you"...,
Please don't do that. Don't put words in my mouth. Neither the word "tricked", nor any conjugation of it appears on my comment (I "searched" it to be sure, you can check up on that). I don't think Apple has tricked anyone. My point was, and still is, Apple is part of a larger consortium that has betrayed the consumers.
Instead of expanding and turning digital music and its related entertainment media into its potential, Apple, and others spent their time and energy tightening the digital screws. Apple has done the best job of making their suite of stuff easy and painless to use, but it's only as long as you behave and stay within the domain they've carefully cordoned off for their market. Betrayal is different than trickery.
..., perhaps evening creating a market for other than just the big names and big labels...,
Perhaps. You have any examples? It's not like there hasn't been sufficient time for evidence of this.
..., But, stop claiming that they are tricking people...,
As I pointed out, I didn't and wasn't. Stop putting words in my mouth.
Hold on...
Just a second...
Any moment now...
..., You just look like an idiot....
Ahhh, the obligatory ad hominem to supply the exclamation point to a post well crafted. Well done!
The iPod's marketing is so clever, they've managed to
bamboozle the author of the article evidenced by sentence one,
paragraph four:
And that's the second thing about the
iPod: it puts you, not them, in control.
It may have given "you" the perception you're in control, but
you're not, you have been betrayed by every corner of the
commercial industry. The only unique factor about Apple and the
iPod is they've made the betrayal seem warm and fuzzy.
Fair use is almost gone. You want to play iPod music anywhere
but on your computer (or four others, God Bless you Apple) or
your iPod? Forget it.
Oh wait, you can spin the track out to a CD,
then rip (a wink and a nod) an mp3 or other sans DRM that will
play on your other mp3 players. Maybe.
Of course, that's assuming some other mechanism isn't in the
pipeline to circumvent that.
Oh, and the music you're writing to a CD to rip back to mp3s?
it started out inferior in quality... with compression.
it will lose quality as it gets passed up the chain and back
down -- you will have to make some "quality" decisions about what
level mp3 you need to retain even the quality left in the track.
Oh yeah, you're going to have to re-enter the track, album,
and artist info, that gets lost in the process.
It's been a string of betrayals by the music industry... which
holds out as bait the enticement some startup band could make it
big like Metallica, Jewel, etc., if they only toe the RIAA and
Music industry line. Apple and iPod are just one piece in the
betrayal tapestry.
(I've mentioned this before -- it bears repeating: one of the
most egregious betrayals by the music industry is the CDDB.
Almost since the creation of CDs digital media was capable of
encoding all album meta-data, e.g., liner notes, lyrics, credits,
and track, title, artist. But they never
provided this! A clever and enterprising public domain database
stepped up to this, at least to create a database of album and
track info. Who populated it? Not the record industry.
We did! And we still get nothing in return.)
Apple can't skate on their complicity just because they made
something warm and fuzzy, something easy to use, something
dominant... in some ways that makes them more evil. Trust us,
you'll like this -- the first one's free.
I'm holding out hope I can continue to find unadulterated CDs,
unencumbered (and high quality) mp3s and players that will play
them all interchangeably and headache free. So far I find enough
Indy available and talent that, for me, the mainstream
entertainment pap is irrelevant.
Oh and, by the way, I'm more than willing to purchase/pay fair
prices for music.
hope NASA doesn't get Rover from VZ
on
Mars Rover Upgraded
·
· Score: 5, Funny
I hope NASA doesn't get it's Rover from Verizon or any of
the other cell phone industry, or some of the upgrades they'd
have to consider would include:
bluetooth (extra charge for making it work the extra
millions of miles)
a surcharge per picture to transfer them back to Earth
extra games for entertainment while waiting for the right
conditions for picture taking (oh, Tetris DOES come free).
blurry video capability
Martian voice-recognition (phone hommme)
internet surfing
GPS
downloadable music (limited to 100 songs)
text messaging
customized ringtones (REM's Man in the Moon is free)
One would think
that as cell phones evolve into cameras, e-mail readers, Web
browser and music players, mobile users would be happy with the
device that fulfills their digital needs, but according to AP, 'a
J.D. Power & Associates survey last year found consumer
satisfaction with their mobile devices has declined since 2003,
with some of the largest drops linked to user interface for
Internet and e-mail services.'"
I, for one, don't think that. I also don't know
whyone would think that.
There reasons one actually might think otherwise is nicely
laid out in the article... As more functions are built in to the
mobile phone, by definition the interface gets more complex.
Heck, the desktop metaphor on the PC, ostensibly a device
dedicated to the computing experience hasn't
come close to perfection. And now the mobile phone industry is
foisting increasingly complex devices with ever
decreasing reliability on the naive public. And
the embedded OS for some of these includes the
not-yet-perfected-desktop-metaphor! WTF?
It's nice to see there is starting to be some backlash.
Aside from the increasing complexity/decreasing reliability
debacle, the mobile phone consortium should never be forgiven for
abandoning what they ostensibly started out to provide: mobile
phone service. I hate using a cell phone, and I can't stand
talking to someone on a cell phone, and I can still easily tell.
It's an interesting industry when one of the advertising
campaigns includes the boast: "fewest dropped calls of
any mobile phone service". It kind of drives home what
the mobile phone industry has failed most at, yet they continue
to drive forward with other unnecessary and no more mature
offerings.
Part of effective marketing is convincing people they want
something they don't really need, or convincing people they need
something they don't really want. The mobile phone industry sure
has come close to perfecting that.
I don't hold out much hope, I've been using cell phones now
for over ten years -- the service has declined, the quality has
gotten worse, and somehow the mobile providers couldn't seem to
be more proud. I'm glad they're not running airlines.
(Aside: you may want to learn the <p> tag... it'll go a long way to making your post readable, thus increasing the chance readers will bother to read it. I read yours because it was a reply to me.)
You said, "..., The argument that, "each pirated copy is not a lost sale because they would not have bought it anyway" does nothing to refute the fact that the software, music, or other intellectual property was stolen..., "
You are correct. It isn't the point. I don't even brush up against making any claim this Intellectual Property (such that it is) isn't stolen.
You said, "..., but that is meaningless when the fact remains that for whatever reason people choose to use the product anyway against the wishes of the creator/owner of the intellectual property..., "
Again, not the point. I agree and concede the point, the product is being used against the creator/owners' wishes.
You said, "..., When you steal intellectual property your are basically saying to the artist, engineer, or creator, "I don't like the terms that you have given to me to use your creation and I don't have any respect for your time and effort so I am going to use it anyway because I would rather have a few more dollars to spend on beer, gasoline, and food and I don't really care if you have money to spend on these things or not as a result of my stealing your work..., "
Or one may be saying, "I have no way of sustaining the burden(s) that is (are) your price... I wish I could, but I can't". At this point, my personal philosophy is one doesn't use the IP, done. But, in my post, I wasn't discussing me. And, again, it really is irrelevant.
You said, "..., There are many software engineers who are unemployed or underemployed because of this and it is not right..., "
This isn't true, or certainly I can find no evidence of its truth. Software companies, especially the ones forwarding this "complaint" of piracy do not languish in poor sales and no profits. These companies are some of the wealthiest in the world, I have not seen a single case of any of these companies, not a single case where a software engineer was let go because of poor sales and lack of profitablity. Once again, though, not really the point.
You said, "..., why not let the owners/creators of the intellectual property decide what and how much to give to the truly needy people in this world..., "
That is exactly what the owners/creators have done. A percentage of the "thieves" are such solely because of the terms. Not saying it's right, but the creators (interesting term) have made their terms, and they are onerous. One company has even had a judgement or two against it for how onerous its "terms" are.
You said, "..., Why do you suppose that Bill Gates, arguably the most generous philanthropist of our time, is focusing on these types of basic needs instead of giving away PCs loaded with Microsoft software to people that have no power to run them anyway and whose family needs vaccinations, food, and clean water first?..., "
This is a question I ask myself every day. On the one hand I couldn't be happier the money is flowing for those in need. But, if you want to argue Bill Gates philanthropic, I'd first have to know what definition you're using. If it's "for the good of fellow people", I disagree. I'd consider (my opinion) this guilt money, considering how Gates has amassed his wealth.
But don't think for a second Gates isn't focusing also on "giving away PCs loaded with Microsoft software", he is. Microsoft continues to get huge media attention for "donations" which aren't what they appear in the press, they're donations of software designed to groom yet another generation of Microsoft dependents, and at the same time are a nifty tax write-off, tallied at the handy MSRP price for write-off purposes.
Each pirated copy, contrary to the BSA (interesting,
what does the BS stand for?) claim,
not only is not a lost sale, but potentially an extra
sale.
BSA's claim is akin to the MPAA/RIAA's claims each
downloaded/pirated DVD/CD is a lost sale. And, there have
(AFAIK, and I've researched this many times) been no studies
coming close to showing causal relationship between pirating and
decreased sales.
Interestingly, one of the most damning contra-examples was the
huge spike in CD sales corresponding to the spike in file sharing
at the emergence of the original Napster. Of course, once the
RIAA and music industry managed to rein Napster in, the dropoff
in shared files was matched almost identically for a decline of
CD sales.
People, especially in the poor couuntries, are running pirated
software because they otherwise would run no software at all.
And, if with this pirated software, they manage to bootstrap
their own situation, or that of their business out of the
netherlands they become much more likely to buy
and pay prices for non-pirated software.
Nothing in the article says anything about them 'crying foul'. It mentions that they're pleading 'not guilty' to the charges but nothing else about their reaction.
My bad, I read a different (additional) article... From this Chicago Tribune article (possible registration required).
The pertinent text from that article:
...,
The popular social networking site improperly lured Saverio Mondelli, 19, and Shaun Harrison, 18, to Los Angeles with the prospect of a consulting contract, said Mondelli's lawyer, Michael Dowd of Manhattan.
And when they arrived in California last week and sat down for a business meeting with what they thought was a contingent of MySpace employees -- who were actually Secret Service agents and local detectives -- they were arrested without warning, Dowd said.
"The proposition to hire them as consultants was made by MySpace," Dowd said. "This was a naked attempt to lure them into the lion's den and to somehow make an allegation of impropriety against them."
So, two kids hacked MySpace, and threatened further damage
unless they were given $150,000, but cry "foul" when lured into a
job offer/interview for the purpose of arresting them.
I'm not sure, but I'm willing to bet extortion dollars thay
MySpace would not bother luring people into their space if no
extortion were there in the first place.
It's pretty amazing how criminals (alleged) cry about violated
rights when apprehended. Yeah, there are constitutional
procedures to guide law enforcement and judicial, thank goodness
for that.
I don't see, assuming these are the kids who did hack
MySpace, any impropriety nor violation of their "space".
And, if you include Windows ME, where's Windows 3.1?
Actually, it might not be a bad idea to have an honorable mention
"collection" entry and include all of the horrible Windows
versions.... (95, CE, ME, NT)
..., it would be almost singularly enough of a reason to cast my vote against any representative who supported such a scheme.
You said: "single issue voters such as yourself are amoung the most intelligent members of our society".
Is there something inherently unclear about the word "almost"? I don't think I implied single issue voter, but congratulations for your "intelligent" inference. (And, speaking of intelligence, "amoung" should be "among". You're welcome.)
Under the aegis of "..., This is peanuts, but given the
billions of transactions every day, this could still raise an
immense income," he said....,
So, government when faced with a need for money (how often
does that happen?) sees that billions of e-mails
and text messages are being sent and infers they can and should
extract a tiny morsel of blood from their constituents,
concluding, "it's only a tiny bit". This is insane.
Better served and directed would be transparency by the
government: "This is how much money we need, and this is what it
will cost each taxpayer..." At least then the people get a more
honest appraisal of what government is doing.
Foisting micro-taxes and micro-debits is also an additional
unnecessary burden upon the billing mechanism for an already too
complex system of charges.
If this were proposed in the United States, it would be almost
singularly enough of a reason to cast my vote against any
representative who supported such a scheme.
I've looked, but haven't found the post that mentions what I think is a major event about this release. It's not that all of us linux-geeks finally have picasa for linux, though I'm happy to finally see it. It's that Google has demonstrated concretely major tools and/or applications can be made available in Linux!
This is a bridge from the Microsoft community of users to the linux world. I provide my neighbors PC support, and I've helped them recover from so many nightmares that were the Microsoft world of viruses and vulnerabilities, and mysterious lockups and crashes (we started with Windows 98, and are now up to XP).
I've coached them through the digital photography transition, and with the emergence of Picasa, they were fat and happy.
But the complaint of Windows and the pitfalls therein remained a constant. Funny, I promised them when they upgraded to a new computer and XP their world would be so much better. It wasn't. They actually considered taking the new machine outside and shooting it (I'm not kidding) with a huge Symantec debacle dominating their Windows experience.
I'd considered broaching the "Linux" suggestion, but it was clear their number one use and activity on their computer, one which they would NOT do without, was Picasa and digital photograph management. Sigh.
The release of a Linux Picasa (albeit, almost alpha) is a watershed event. If kinks are quickly fixed and the Linux Picasa matures soon, my neighbors, and others will soon have the option of Linux and a much more stable (and secure) platform (not to mention, free).
An added side benny, all of a sudden, my support role becomes enjoyable, I love working in the *nix environment, and many tools and apps I've had around for years become available for friends and family -- just wrap a little friendly html around them for their ease of use.
Thank you, Google.... This could be the beginning of a wonderful friendship!
Up in Redmond, Microsoft developers proudly talk of
dogfooding the software they write. Running beta software is the
only way to learn what works and what doesn't. A copy of Windows
Vista running on a test machine in the corner isn't likely to get
a serious workout. To find the pain points -- another popular
Microsoft expression -- you have to run that beta code on the
machine you use every day.
Wasn't there a slashdot reference to an article in the last
week where Microsoft "was considering" removing admin access from
their employees? That doesn't sound like "eating their own
dogfood". As long as they're all running Windows with the
highest access levels (admin), they're potentially missing
serious security problems.
Since Lowest User Access (LUA) is a huge issue around
tightening Windows security, running Vista within Microsoft means
little around testing security. And, unless they're shipping
Vista with defaults of non-admin user accounts, the beta testing
world isn't likely to bang on that code hard enough.
It's not clear from the article, nor do I know enough about
the Vista beta (not about to try it on any of my machines...)
whether the LUA concept is in play. Any beta testers out there
care to weigh in?
If this happens, and MPAA loses, who will be the stewards
of our movies? Who will be there to serve the movie-viewing
public? Who will ensure we go en masse to the theater over an
opening-weekend to recoup movie-making costs before word spreads
of what a turkey that movie is (more on that in sec)?
This looks serious. Please, please, please... leave the MPAA
alone! They are our shepherds.
(I saw an interview a long time ago about one of the MPAA
techniques to ensure ROI on their turkeys. Multi-screen theaters
were extorted into showing and advertising known turkeys to
maximize viewers before word spread about how bad the movie
really was. They also had to commit to a minimum number of
showings. In return, they were "allowed", given the privelege,
of showing true blockblosters. So, if it's a movie's first
weekend, and it's getting HUGE publicity (Steve Martin's
RV
), consider it a red flag, and wait for word of mouth
about the movie's worth.)
I think you missed the entire point of his post. He basically said, "Look Mr. School District, it's not like I'm one of the columbine kids. I haven't threatened anyone, and you're still treating me like shit. WTF?!"
Well, you've paraphrased what he said, with your interpretation. Directly quoting the student, and with virtually complete context the student actually said (emphasis mine),
"..., I feel threatened by you, I cant even have a public Web page with out you bullying me and telling me what has to be removed. Where is this freedom of speech that this government is sworn to uphold?... Did you ever stop to think this will start a community backlash? The kids at Columbine did what the did because they were bullied.... "
You say
It takes a pretty drasticly slanted interpretation, diseased mind, or an obvious agenda to manipulate that into
I respectfully disagree. Juxtaposed, "you bullying me", and "kids at Columbine did what the (sic) did because they were bullied" don't require slanted interpretation, a diseased mind, or an obvious agenda. Your interpretation is based on your paraphrase of the quote. I'm looking at the kid's words.
I'm not endorsing rampant censorship and monitoring of students' outside activities, but I respect a school's initiative to recognize a potential problem before something happens. I'm guessing there are parents of about 13 high school students in Colorado who wished more attention had been paid to the postings of the Columbine students.
A threat must be direct and immediate for it to fall outside of first amendment restrictions. His "threats" are vague, indirect, and unlikely to result in any real consequences.
It's an ongoing debate, whether or not a student in a
public school has "rights". Of course they have the right not to
be bullied, this student stretches the metaphor (he claims he is
bullied because the school won't let him post anything he wants).
Schools impose all kinds of restrictions on students. Places
of business impose all kinds of restrictions on employees.
Owners of property impose restrictions on trespassers.
This is legal. Schools are allowed to have dress codes.
Schools are allowed to decide what constitutes "non-disruptive"
activity to the learning environment.
The unanswered question in this article is, did the student
cross any line violating the school policy? If you read the
quote, in legal terms there is an implicit threat -- some
attorneys will argue "assault". Other attorneys will argue "free
speech.
I think the kid is a blowhard, I don't think he's committed
any crime, but his statement (especially with a veiled threat in
the name of the Columbine assholes) exudes attitude. In my
opinion (only) I think it's disruptive. And I think the school
may be doing the right thing. I guess the courts get the final
say.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks, yours has been the best and most comprehensive reply, very helpful.
I didn't mean to, but guess I did, imply "useless", I only listed what I saw from my perspective. You, and others, have salted me with some ideas, excellent.
This is an interesting device, but:
advantages:
disadvantages:
I can't quite figure where this product fits. I'm guessing it's more of a business solution, but if that's true, I can't imagine it in any of the business settings I've experienced.
It's kind of cool technology, but is it a solution in search of a problem?
Well I was able to get through about 30 pages of this "review" and pretty much gave up. Hundreds of screen captures of Vista "stuff" with a caption describing said capture does not a review make.
So, I went to the last page to work my way back for summary and recommendation info. Turns out, last page is the summary. Save yourself some time, the gist of this article is:
This is a review?
It was TSO/almost ISPF (might have been available, but noone had learned or started using it yet) in 1983. No REXX available for TSO/MVS, they WERE using the recommended procedures from IBM. It was a telco so the size issues were pretty enormous back then.
I overheard a friend bemoaning the loathsome monthly mainframe configuration task. It took four members of her team one week of every month to edit in TSO the huge configuration files to gen the mainframes. She showed me what kind of edits were typical.
I took an example month's suite of edits, created an RJE job that streamed the gen config to a little used ATT Unix box on which I was self-teaching the coolness that was (and is) Unix.
On the Unix side, I piped the stream into a "sed" script with a file defining all of the edits. The entire round trip of the unedited file back into place with full edits on the mainframe took less than one hour and required no monitoring or work on my part other than initiating the job.
Not only did this save gi-huge time and man hours for that team, the edits were always perfect (the edits were very simple, e.g., new date and size configuration information), and the preparation from one month to the next required only minor edits to the "sed" edit script, which took minutes typically.
I got big-time recognition for what I thought was a simple favor at the time. We were very pleased.
Oh, and then 20 years later a MotherFucker laid me off... excellence doesn't guarantee employ. Sigh.
All true. I wasn't necessarily lashing out. I sometimes am frustrated by attention to things, as you put it, "not broken".
So, when there are things potentially needing fixing I'd rather see energy spent there. I haven't gotten mod points now for well over two years. Turns out, after being laid off from a job of 21 years, my available extra time to be MORE active on slashdot pushed me past +1 sigma in the slashdot activity -- slashdot picks modders from the norm.
Considering I do alright in my karma, etc., I think the modding system is broken (and there is evidence many others think so) and wish they'd redesign that.
(The telco that laid me off (sorry, can't give any clues in your qwest to guess which one) -- I was on the team that created their public facing web page. I can't begin to describe the discussions, time and energy spent over things like "this button is a little to brownish, it needs to be more yellowish". I was always the iconoclast, fighting to work on logic, database issues, but everyone wanted to be an artist.)
I just re-designed my house. It's was gray, but is now slightly darker gray. I've widened the white trim around the windows and porch railings a bit. And, I added a remote keypad for my automatic garage door opener.
Seriously, I can take the new page, put it as a 50% transparent layer under the old slashdot, and it comes close to identical. Is there something more under the covers?
Now maybe we can get on to the less important stuff like fixing the mod system. (Which will now demonstrate its fickle nature by modding me to -1.)
(I love slashdot. I think it is one of the most important forums on the internet. This re-design seems very similar to the old design... I guess it wasn't intended to be a makeover.)
Hmmm, something I don't do often, I'm agreeing completely with all of your points.
I "launched" a bit and was probably primed... I'm soooo tired of DRM in almost any form and from any vendor. I don't think Apple is perfect.
And, as many posters pointed out, my rant appeared to mix iTunes and iPod. That was intentional. It is the culture and behavior Apple cultivates -- most iPod owners I know go the route of iTunes, and I find for most the distinction truly is blurred.
I failed to make my case on one point about DRM and mp3 compatibility. You are correct, mp3s play fine on iPods... it is the iTunes (again, based on my experience this is where most iPod owners go for their music) incompatibility the other way that frustrates.
I'll back off Apple, they aren't RIAA, and much of what and how they've done was dictated by RIAA.
Thanks for a well stated and reasoned reply.
Regards.
yagu...
..., One goes to the itunes store and buys a music file with a known quality...,
People don't know about quality, they assume it's good, as in, just like CDs. It's not their fault, noone really tells them differently. Yes, there's a lot of techno-mumbo-babble, but it is beyond the average consumers understanding. The surprise is when they create a CD, and rip, and start hearing funny noises. I'm not saying Apple lies about that, but the landscape for consumers has changed, and they're not being given the full story in easy-to-understand terms.
..., But complaining that their marketing "tricked you" ...,
Please don't do that. Don't put words in my mouth. Neither the word "tricked", nor any conjugation of it appears on my comment (I "searched" it to be sure, you can check up on that). I don't think Apple has tricked anyone. My point was, and still is, Apple is part of a larger consortium that has betrayed the consumers.
Instead of expanding and turning digital music and its related entertainment media into its potential, Apple, and others spent their time and energy tightening the digital screws. Apple has done the best job of making their suite of stuff easy and painless to use, but it's only as long as you behave and stay within the domain they've carefully cordoned off for their market. Betrayal is different than trickery.
..., perhaps evening creating a market for other than just the big names and big labels...,
Perhaps. You have any examples? It's not like there hasn't been sufficient time for evidence of this.
..., But, stop claiming that they are tricking people...,
As I pointed out, I didn't and wasn't. Stop putting words in my mouth.
Hold on...
Just a second...
Any moment now...
..., You just look like an idiot. ...
Ahhh, the obligatory ad hominem to supply the exclamation point to a post well crafted. Well done!
The iPod's marketing is so clever, they've managed to bamboozle the author of the article evidenced by sentence one, paragraph four:
It may have given "you" the perception you're in control, but you're not, you have been betrayed by every corner of the commercial industry. The only unique factor about Apple and the iPod is they've made the betrayal seem warm and fuzzy.
Fair use is almost gone. You want to play iPod music anywhere but on your computer (or four others, God Bless you Apple) or your iPod? Forget it.
Oh wait, you can spin the track out to a CD, then rip (a wink and a nod) an mp3 or other sans DRM that will play on your other mp3 players. Maybe.
Of course, that's assuming some other mechanism isn't in the pipeline to circumvent that.
Oh, and the music you're writing to a CD to rip back to mp3s?
It's been a string of betrayals by the music industry... which holds out as bait the enticement some startup band could make it big like Metallica, Jewel, etc., if they only toe the RIAA and Music industry line. Apple and iPod are just one piece in the betrayal tapestry.
(I've mentioned this before -- it bears repeating: one of the most egregious betrayals by the music industry is the CDDB. Almost since the creation of CDs digital media was capable of encoding all album meta-data, e.g., liner notes, lyrics, credits, and track, title, artist. But they never provided this! A clever and enterprising public domain database stepped up to this, at least to create a database of album and track info. Who populated it? Not the record industry. We did! And we still get nothing in return.)
Apple can't skate on their complicity just because they made something warm and fuzzy, something easy to use, something dominant... in some ways that makes them more evil. Trust us, you'll like this -- the first one's free.
I'm holding out hope I can continue to find unadulterated CDs, unencumbered (and high quality) mp3s and players that will play them all interchangeably and headache free. So far I find enough Indy available and talent that, for me, the mainstream entertainment pap is irrelevant.
Oh and, by the way, I'm more than willing to purchase/pay fair prices for music.
I hope NASA doesn't get it's Rover from Verizon or any of the other cell phone industry, or some of the upgrades they'd have to consider would include:
I wonder if the Rover gets unlimited roaming?
Shazbot, my head is STILL ringing from the utilitarian cell phone debate. (or is that a Britney Speers ringtone?)
From the slashdot summary:
I, for one, don't think that. I also don't know why one would think that.
There reasons one actually might think otherwise is nicely laid out in the article... As more functions are built in to the mobile phone, by definition the interface gets more complex.
Heck, the desktop metaphor on the PC, ostensibly a device dedicated to the computing experience hasn't come close to perfection. And now the mobile phone industry is foisting increasingly complex devices with ever decreasing reliability on the naive public. And the embedded OS for some of these includes the not-yet-perfected-desktop-metaphor! WTF? It's nice to see there is starting to be some backlash.
Aside from the increasing complexity/decreasing reliability debacle, the mobile phone consortium should never be forgiven for abandoning what they ostensibly started out to provide: mobile phone service. I hate using a cell phone, and I can't stand talking to someone on a cell phone, and I can still easily tell.
It's an interesting industry when one of the advertising campaigns includes the boast: "fewest dropped calls of any mobile phone service". It kind of drives home what the mobile phone industry has failed most at, yet they continue to drive forward with other unnecessary and no more mature offerings.
Part of effective marketing is convincing people they want something they don't really need, or convincing people they need something they don't really want. The mobile phone industry sure has come close to perfecting that.
I don't hold out much hope, I've been using cell phones now for over ten years -- the service has declined, the quality has gotten worse, and somehow the mobile providers couldn't seem to be more proud. I'm glad they're not running airlines.
(Aside: you may want to learn the <p> tag... it'll go a long way to making your post readable, thus increasing the chance readers will bother to read it. I read yours because it was a reply to me.)
You said, "..., The argument that, "each pirated copy is not a lost sale because they would not have bought it anyway" does nothing to refute the fact that the software, music, or other intellectual property was stolen..., "
You are correct. It isn't the point. I don't even brush up against making any claim this Intellectual Property (such that it is) isn't stolen.
You said, "..., but that is meaningless when the fact remains that for whatever reason people choose to use the product anyway against the wishes of the creator/owner of the intellectual property..., "
Again, not the point. I agree and concede the point, the product is being used against the creator/owners' wishes.
You said, "..., When you steal intellectual property your are basically saying to the artist, engineer, or creator, "I don't like the terms that you have given to me to use your creation and I don't have any respect for your time and effort so I am going to use it anyway because I would rather have a few more dollars to spend on beer, gasoline, and food and I don't really care if you have money to spend on these things or not as a result of my stealing your work..., "
Or one may be saying, "I have no way of sustaining the burden(s) that is (are) your price... I wish I could, but I can't". At this point, my personal philosophy is one doesn't use the IP, done. But, in my post, I wasn't discussing me. And, again, it really is irrelevant.
You said, "..., There are many software engineers who are unemployed or underemployed because of this and it is not right..., "
This isn't true, or certainly I can find no evidence of its truth. Software companies, especially the ones forwarding this "complaint" of piracy do not languish in poor sales and no profits. These companies are some of the wealthiest in the world, I have not seen a single case of any of these companies, not a single case where a software engineer was let go because of poor sales and lack of profitablity. Once again, though, not really the point.
You said, "..., why not let the owners/creators of the intellectual property decide what and how much to give to the truly needy people in this world..., "
That is exactly what the owners/creators have done. A percentage of the "thieves" are such solely because of the terms. Not saying it's right, but the creators (interesting term) have made their terms, and they are onerous. One company has even had a judgement or two against it for how onerous its "terms" are.
You said, "..., Why do you suppose that Bill Gates, arguably the most generous philanthropist of our time, is focusing on these types of basic needs instead of giving away PCs loaded with Microsoft software to people that have no power to run them anyway and whose family needs vaccinations, food, and clean water first?..., "
This is a question I ask myself every day. On the one hand I couldn't be happier the money is flowing for those in need. But, if you want to argue Bill Gates philanthropic, I'd first have to know what definition you're using. If it's "for the good of fellow people", I disagree. I'd consider (my opinion) this guilt money, considering how Gates has amassed his wealth.
But don't think for a second Gates isn't focusing also on "giving away PCs loaded with Microsoft software", he is. Microsoft continues to get huge media attention for "donations" which aren't what they appear in the press, they're donations of software designed to groom yet another generation of Microsoft dependents, and at the same time are a nifty tax write-off, tallied at the handy MSRP price for write-off purposes.
But, back to the origi
Each pirated copy, contrary to the BSA (interesting, what does the BS stand for?) claim, not only is not a lost sale, but potentially an extra sale.
BSA's claim is akin to the MPAA/RIAA's claims each downloaded/pirated DVD/CD is a lost sale. And, there have (AFAIK, and I've researched this many times) been no studies coming close to showing causal relationship between pirating and decreased sales.
Interestingly, one of the most damning contra-examples was the huge spike in CD sales corresponding to the spike in file sharing at the emergence of the original Napster. Of course, once the RIAA and music industry managed to rein Napster in, the dropoff in shared files was matched almost identically for a decline of CD sales.
People, especially in the poor couuntries, are running pirated software because they otherwise would run no software at all. And, if with this pirated software, they manage to bootstrap their own situation, or that of their business out of the netherlands they become much more likely to buy and pay prices for non-pirated software.
My bad, I read a different (additional) article... From this Chicago Tribune article (possible registration required).
The pertinent text from that article:
So, two kids hacked MySpace, and threatened further damage unless they were given $150,000, but cry "foul" when lured into a job offer/interview for the purpose of arresting them.
I'm not sure, but I'm willing to bet extortion dollars thay MySpace would not bother luring people into their space if no extortion were there in the first place.
It's pretty amazing how criminals (alleged) cry about violated rights when apprehended. Yeah, there are constitutional procedures to guide law enforcement and judicial, thank goodness for that.
I don't see, assuming these are the kids who did hack MySpace, any impropriety nor violation of their "space".
Good list... where's X10?
And, if you include Windows ME, where's Windows 3.1? Actually, it might not be a bad idea to have an honorable mention "collection" entry and include all of the horrible Windows versions.... (95, CE, ME, NT)
You said: "single issue voters such as yourself are amoung the most intelligent members of our society".
Is there something inherently unclear about the word "almost"? I don't think I implied single issue voter, but congratulations for your "intelligent" inference. (And, speaking of intelligence, "amoung" should be "among". You're welcome.)
Under the aegis of "..., This is peanuts, but given the billions of transactions every day, this could still raise an immense income," he said....,
So, government when faced with a need for money (how often does that happen?) sees that billions of e-mails and text messages are being sent and infers they can and should extract a tiny morsel of blood from their constituents, concluding, "it's only a tiny bit". This is insane.
Better served and directed would be transparency by the government: "This is how much money we need, and this is what it will cost each taxpayer..." At least then the people get a more honest appraisal of what government is doing.
Foisting micro-taxes and micro-debits is also an additional unnecessary burden upon the billing mechanism for an already too complex system of charges.
If this were proposed in the United States, it would be almost singularly enough of a reason to cast my vote against any representative who supported such a scheme.
I've looked, but haven't found the post that mentions what I think is a major event about this release. It's not that all of us linux-geeks finally have picasa for linux, though I'm happy to finally see it. It's that Google has demonstrated concretely major tools and/or applications can be made available in Linux!
This is a bridge from the Microsoft community of users to the linux world. I provide my neighbors PC support, and I've helped them recover from so many nightmares that were the Microsoft world of viruses and vulnerabilities, and mysterious lockups and crashes (we started with Windows 98, and are now up to XP).
I've coached them through the digital photography transition, and with the emergence of Picasa, they were fat and happy.
But the complaint of Windows and the pitfalls therein remained a constant. Funny, I promised them when they upgraded to a new computer and XP their world would be so much better. It wasn't. They actually considered taking the new machine outside and shooting it (I'm not kidding) with a huge Symantec debacle dominating their Windows experience.
I'd considered broaching the "Linux" suggestion, but it was clear their number one use and activity on their computer, one which they would NOT do without, was Picasa and digital photograph management. Sigh.
The release of a Linux Picasa (albeit, almost alpha) is a watershed event. If kinks are quickly fixed and the Linux Picasa matures soon, my neighbors, and others will soon have the option of Linux and a much more stable (and secure) platform (not to mention, free).
An added side benny, all of a sudden, my support role becomes enjoyable, I love working in the *nix environment, and many tools and apps I've had around for years become available for friends and family -- just wrap a little friendly html around them for their ease of use.
Thank you, Google.... This could be the beginning of a wonderful friendship!
From the very first paragraph of the article:
Wasn't there a slashdot reference to an article in the last week where Microsoft "was considering" removing admin access from their employees? That doesn't sound like "eating their own dogfood". As long as they're all running Windows with the highest access levels (admin), they're potentially missing serious security problems.
Since Lowest User Access (LUA) is a huge issue around tightening Windows security, running Vista within Microsoft means little around testing security. And, unless they're shipping Vista with defaults of non-admin user accounts, the beta testing world isn't likely to bang on that code hard enough.
It's not clear from the article, nor do I know enough about the Vista beta (not about to try it on any of my machines...) whether the LUA concept is in play. Any beta testers out there care to weigh in?
If this happens, and MPAA loses, who will be the stewards of our movies? Who will be there to serve the movie-viewing public? Who will ensure we go en masse to the theater over an opening-weekend to recoup movie-making costs before word spreads of what a turkey that movie is (more on that in sec)?
This looks serious. Please, please, please... leave the MPAA alone! They are our shepherds.
(I saw an interview a long time ago about one of the MPAA techniques to ensure ROI on their turkeys. Multi-screen theaters were extorted into showing and advertising known turkeys to maximize viewers before word spread about how bad the movie really was. They also had to commit to a minimum number of showings. In return, they were "allowed", given the privelege, of showing true blockblosters. So, if it's a movie's first weekend, and it's getting HUGE publicity (Steve Martin's
- RV
), consider it a red flag, and wait for word of mouth about the movie's worth.)Well, you've paraphrased what he said, with your interpretation. Directly quoting the student, and with virtually complete context the student actually said (emphasis mine),
You say
I respectfully disagree. Juxtaposed, "you bullying me", and "kids at Columbine did what the (sic) did because they were bullied" don't require slanted interpretation, a diseased mind, or an obvious agenda. Your interpretation is based on your paraphrase of the quote. I'm looking at the kid's words.
I'm not endorsing rampant censorship and monitoring of students' outside activities, but I respect a school's initiative to recognize a potential problem before something happens. I'm guessing there are parents of about 13 high school students in Colorado who wished more attention had been paid to the postings of the Columbine students.
A threat must be direct and immediate for it to fall outside of first amendment restrictions. His "threats" are vague, indirect, and unlikely to result in any real consequences.
Vague threats are sufficient. Look at this page and consider the paragraph:
A vague threat often is intentionally designed to avoid legal consequences. Sometimes the attempt works, sometimes it doesn't.
This student referenced Columbine, which is vague. However it won't guarantee impunity.
It's an ongoing debate, whether or not a student in a public school has "rights". Of course they have the right not to be bullied, this student stretches the metaphor (he claims he is bullied because the school won't let him post anything he wants).
Schools impose all kinds of restrictions on students. Places of business impose all kinds of restrictions on employees. Owners of property impose restrictions on trespassers.
This is legal. Schools are allowed to have dress codes. Schools are allowed to decide what constitutes "non-disruptive" activity to the learning environment.
The unanswered question in this article is, did the student cross any line violating the school policy? If you read the quote, in legal terms there is an implicit threat -- some attorneys will argue "assault". Other attorneys will argue "free speech.
I think the kid is a blowhard, I don't think he's committed any crime, but his statement (especially with a veiled threat in the name of the Columbine assholes) exudes attitude. In my opinion (only) I think it's disruptive. And I think the school may be doing the right thing. I guess the courts get the final say.